HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

W.P.(C) No. 2654 of 2021

1. Lakharam Karsh, S/o. Late Shri Rama Karsh, Aged About 42 Years, R/o. Village

Nagjhar, Tehsil Malkharuda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

2. Sundarlal, S/o. Late Shri Rama Karsh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o. Village

Nagjhar, Tehsil Malkharuda, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.

3. Laxminbai, W/o. Late Shri Rama Karsh, Aged About 65 Years, R/o. Village

Nagjhar, Tehsil Malkharuda, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.

4. Kumaribai, W/o. Shri Jambo Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o. Village Kataud,

Tehsil Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Water Resource Department,

Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur,

Chhattisgarh.

2. Collector, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.

3. Land Acquisition Officer / Sub Divisional Officer Sakti, District Janjgir Champa,

Chhattisgarh.

4. Executive Engineer, Minimata Baango Nahar Division 4, Dabhra, District Janjgir

Champa, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents

For Petitioner

:

Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate

For State/Respondents

:

Mr. Siddharth Dubey, Dy. Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

ORDER

02.07.2021

Heard

1.

The grievance of the petitioners are that the petitioners owned the land bearing

Khasra No.329/2, 339/2 & 1222/1 admeasuring 18 dismil, 23 dismil & 21 dismil

respectively at Village Nagjhar, out of which 0.17 dismil land has been acquired

for preparation of Canal. It is contended that initially the notification though was

made on 10.12.2002 under Section 4(1) and Section 17(A) of the Land

Acquisition Act, 1894 but no award has been passed and no compensation has

been determined or paid to the petitioners.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per the Panchnama which is

on record, which was prepared on the spot, would show that the Canal is

already constructed and it passing though over the land of the petitioners.

Therefore, since the land is acquired without the compensation having been

paid, the State be directed to pay the compensation in accordance with law.

3.

Learned State counsel would submit that they are on the advance copy, as

such, they are not aware whether the award was passed or not, and whether

the land of the petitioners are actually affected by construction of Canal is

required to be verified.

4.

Prima facie, reading of the Panchnama shows that certain Canal passes over

the land of the petitioners; therefore, whether the land of the petitioners were

acquired for construction of Canal is required to be ascertained for which the

respondent No.2 & 3 shall carry out the demarcation through the Tahsildar to

find out whether the land of the petitioners have been used for construction of

Canal or not? If it is found that the construction has been made over the land of

the petitioners and if the award for land acquisition has not been passed and if

the compensation amount has not been paid or deposited with any authority,

then the acquisition proceeding may be drawn for acquisition of land of the

petitioners in accordance with law. The aforesaid exercise will be carried out

within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.

With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed off.

Sd/-

(Goutam Bhaduri)

JUDGE

Aks